[FlemmingLemming]

Let me get this out of the way, I'm a fan of CM Punk. However, I am far from biased. I've enjoyed his work over the last few years with the likes of Cena, Taker and Heyman as much as I couldn't stand his "Giant Toolbox" "Clown Shoes" corny jokes face character. But every now and again people complain about his ability to draw as if the WWE ever relied on him in that capacity. Whether it be that the WWE doesn't believe that he is a draw, or that he just doesn't appeal to a wide enough fan base, there is no need to criticize Punk for this because he was never put in a position to do so.

On it's face, you would say that a 434 day reign as WWE Champion would mean that someone is being asked to deliver ratings and PPV buys. To a certain extent that is true; however, the truth of the matter is that Punk's reign as champion was only a shiny veneer on a supporting role.

This is a list of PPV main events after Punk became involved in the WWE title picture (keeping in mind that PPV main events generally refer to the major storyline for the show):

MITB 2011 (Punk/Cena)
SummerSlam 2011 (Punk/Cena) *Del Rio cashes in on Punk
Night of Champions 2011 (HHH/Punk) *HHH takes of the suit for one night to bury an emerging Punk and put him in his place, and I don't believe HHH going over Punk in this match can be taken any other way.
Hell In A Cell 2011 (Del Rio/Punk/Cena) *Del Rio wins for some reason
Vengeance 2011 (Del Rio/Cena)
Survivor Series (The Rock/Cena vs. The Miz/R-Truth) *Punk regains the title from Del Rio beginning the 434 Day reign.
TLC 2011 (Punk/The Miz/Del Rio)

Royal Rumble 2012 (Cena/Kane)
Wrestlemania (The Rock/Cena)
Extreme Rules 2012 (Lesnar/Cena)
Over The Limit 2012 (Cena/Laurinitis)
No Way Out 2012 (Cena/Big Show)
MITB 2012 (John Cena wins MITB)
SummerSlam 2012 (HHH/Lesnar)
Night of Champions (Punk/Cena)
Hell In A Cell (Punk/Ryback)
Survivor Series (Punk/Cena/Ryback)
TLC 2012 (Cena/Ziggler) *Punk was injured

Royal Rumble 2013 (Punk/Rock) *Rock ends Punk's title streak.

If Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, Will Smith, etc... make a movie that bombs at the box office, no one looks at their co-star and says, "After Earth bombed because Will Smith's son can't draw." No, they blame Will Smith.

 

[Sonnen Says]

Exactly they never backed him up 100%. Yet they say he's a failure.

 

[GillbergReturns]

With the push Punk got you're expecting him to rise to the status of a Macho Man Randy Savage or the Rock where they're just 1a and capable of carrying the company as well.

You can lay down all the excuses you want about poor booking but that's life as a #2. Rock was feuding with Billy Gunn and the Bulldog, then went down to the tag teams and when his push actually came HHH was squeezing wins from him.

 

[PepeSilvia]

he had the title for 400 + days. added legitimacy to the title.

how was he a failure? in my opinion he's a top 3 guy full time guy in the wwe (cena, punk, orton)

wwe's always gona be looking for the cena/batista built guys. and while cena is with the company he's gona be the guy

 

[Happenstan]

Why does always winning or closing the show matter? You either connect with people and get people to want to watch you (hence...drawing) or you don't. Punk couldn't get tons of people to want to watch him last year. I find it hilarious how some seem to think if he had closed every show or won every match (which he practically did all year long in 2012) that that would some how make casual fans suddenly fall all over themselves to watch Phil every Monday night. What a joke of a premise.

 

[Ungratefulness]

I thought people brought up his segments losing viewers when they said he couldn't draw.

 

[GillbergReturns]

Why does always winning or closing the show matter? You either connect with people and get people to want to watch you (hence...drawing) or you don't. Punk didn't couldn't get people to want to watch him last year. I find it hilarious how some seem to think if he had closed every show or won every match (which he practically did all year long in 2012) that that would some how make casual fans suddenly fall all over themselves to watch Phil every Monday night. What a joke of a premise.

Agreed. Monday Night Raw has 4 millions every week. A B level PPV gets purchased in 200k homes. So what roughly 1/20th of the audience has an emotional attachment on what match closed the show.

 

[scrilla]

With the push Punk got you're expecting him to rise to the status of a Macho Man Randy Savage or the Rock where they're just 1a and capable of carrying the company as well.

You can lay down all the excuses you want about poor booking but that's life as a #2. Rock was feuding with Billy Gunn and the Bulldog, then went down to the tag teams and when his push actually came HHH was squeezing wins from him.

remember that HIAC show without Cena that popped a bigger buyrate than the one the year before with Cena? the one headlined by CM Punk? stick to being some hatewatching buyrate and ratings obsessed attitude era nostalgia mark though.

 

[GillbergReturns]

remember that HIAC show without Cena that popped a bigger buyrate than the one the year before with Cena? the one headlined by CM Punk? stick to being some hatewatching buyrate and ratings obsessed attitude era nostalgia mark though.

Means very little. You have to do it at the big boy PPVs where WWE actually makes bank and look how Lesnar vs Punk faired.

 

[Mountain Rushmore]

With the push Punk got you're expecting him to rise to the status of a Macho Man Randy Savage or the Rock where they're just 1a and capable of carrying the company as well.

You can lay down all the excuses you want about poor booking but that's life as a #2. Rock was feuding with Billy Gunn and the Bulldog, then went down to the tag teams and when his push actually came HHH was squeezing wins from him.

I came here to say this. He didn't break the ceiling, considering his push, that's on him. He was still put in main event level feuds and given the championship for 434 days, I'm sick of his hardcore marks acting like he was booked like shit.

And anyway, he didn't fail. Jokes on all the marks for getting your hopes up. Why would WWE have replaced Cena when the man can still go and still does great for business? That was never the plan. The plan was to establish an adequate 1b or #2 guy to step in where Cena couldn't. And they did that, mission accomplished, shut the fuck up about it already.

 

[Happenstan]

remember that HIAC show without Cena that popped a bigger buyrate than the one the year before with Cena? the one headlined by CM Punk? stick to being some hatewatching buyrate and ratings obsessed attitude era nostalgia mark though.

Punk was in the main event for both HIAC shows you are referencing. You do know an argument could be made that Ryback drew the extra buys as it was his first major push into the main event after squashing every jobber on the roster, right?

I came here to say this. He didn't break the ceiling, considering his push, that's on him. He was still put in main event level feuds and given the championship for 434 days, I'm sick of his hardcore marks acting like he was booked like shit.

A sensible Punk fan? I didn't realize you guys still existed.

 

[scrilla]

Means very little. You have to do it at the big boy PPVs where WWE actually makes bank and look how Lesnar vs Punk faired.

you mean the show main evented by John Cena? :ti

 

[Sonnen Says]

With the push Punk got you're expecting him to rise to the status of a Macho Man Randy Savage or the Rock where they're just 1a and capable of carrying the company as well.

You can lay down all the excuses you want about poor booking but that's life as a #2. Rock was feuding with Billy Gunn and the Bulldog, then went down to the tag teams and when his push actually came HHH was squeezing wins from him.

Yeah because comparing the hottest time in wrestling history with today is such a good argument. Seriously Punk push was nowhere near those guys you mentioned they actually meant something because of what they got and what they had at that time. Back than the roster is 1000000000x times more over than today roster with actual credibility. Imagine Punk/Michaels, Punk/Angle, Punk/Eddie, etc. during his reign it will do much better since those guys are over and people actually care about them. But we dont have those guys.

 

[validreasoning]

Why does always winning or closing the show matter? You either connect with people and get people to want to watch you (hence...drawing) or you don't. Punk couldn't get tons of people to want to watch him last year. I find it hilarious how some seem to think if he had closed every show or won every match (which he practically did all year long in 2012) that that would some how make casual fans suddenly fall all over themselves to watch Phil every Monday night. What a joke of a premise.

wins and losses do matter though. look at ryback during his win streak this time last year and look at him now

booking punk to lose at the next four ppvs after mitb 201 was idiotic especially if you are trying to build the guy up (he had won at only one ppv from october 2009 to may 2011 prior to mitb)

same thing with bryan, its vital you book him strong after summerslam if you want people to take him serious given his months of playing a comedy guy, which of course is the opposite of what they did having him get beat down for 9 shows in a row

 

[GillbergReturns]

I came here to say this. He didn't break the ceiling, considering his push, that's on him. He was still put in main event level feuds and given the championship for 434 days, I'm sick of his hardcore marks acting like he was booked like shit.

And anyway, he didn't fail. Jokes on all the marks for getting your hopes up. Why would WWE have replaced Cena when the man can still go and still does great for business? That was never the plan. The plan was to establish an adequate 1b or #2 guy to deep in where Cena couldn't. And they did that, mission accomplished, shut the fuck up about it already.

I agree. Punk did a fine job and has really established as one of the biggest superstar outside of Cena in this era. He's eclipsed Orton, Edge and maybe even Batista although that one might be debatable.

Just couldn't get to 1b status.

 

[FITZ]

Agreed. Monday Night Raw has 4 millions every week. A B level PPV gets purchased in 200k homes. So what roughly 1/20th of the audience has an emotional attachment on what match closed the show.

remember that HIAC show without Cena that popped a bigger buyrate than the one the year before with Cena? the one headlined by CM Punk? stick to being some hatewatching buyrate and ratings obsessed attitude era nostalgia mark though.

Means very little. You have to do it at the big boy PPVs where WWE actually makes bank and look how Lesnar vs Punk faired.

I found this exchange to be particularly amusing.

 

[HOJO]

I came here to say this. He didn't break the ceiling, considering his push, that's on him. He was still put in main event level feuds and given the championship for 434 days, I'm sick of his hardcore marks acting like he was booked like shit.

And anyway, he didn't fail. Jokes on all the marks for getting your hopes up. Why would WWE have replaced Cena when the man can still go and still does great for business? That was never the plan. The plan was to establish an adequate 1b or #2 guy to deep in where Cena couldn't. And they did that, mission accomplished, shut the fuck up about it already.

He was booked like shit. He looked like a fucking geek after Summerslam all the way to Survivor Series. He lost pretty much EVERY match he had after Summerslam, including 3 PPV matches, one of which was a WWE Title match he lost clean in.

Punk was actually not doing good business in the ratings. It's not like Punk and Cena were close draws but Cena came up drawing more. No. Cena's business just wasn't as bad as Punk's was. And that's WWE's fault. they built his title chase like shit, he lost momentum, and barely recovered.

 

[FlemmingLemming]

Why does always winning or closing the show matter? You either connect with people and get people to want to watch you (hence...drawing) or you don't. Punk couldn't get tons of people to want to watch him last year. I find it hilarious how some seem to think if he had closed every show or won every match (which he practically did all year long in 2012) that that would some how make casual fans suddenly fall all over themselves to watch Phil every Monday night. What a joke of a premise.

But that's not my premise. You also have to consider how CM Punk was inserted into the main event in 2011. He was a guy that had been around for years and had developed the reputation of being a mid-carder -- a reputation that is often hard to shake. So, he went from mid-card to main event status overnight after the pipebomb promo. There wasn't a real build behind it like Cena and Orton coming along as younger guys and being built as champions. He basically went from being the guy that jobbed to Orton at Wrestlemania 27 to being the WWE champion with only a promo in between, so do you consider it logical that the entire audience wouldn't be behind him at that point. A large portion of viewers still saw him as the mid-carder that he'd become. And after he was able to shake that, WWE never put him in the type of storylines that would hotshot him to superstardom.

 

[Headliner]

No one wrestler can change anything without Vince McMahon's approval. Therefore other opinions are foolish.

 

[Darren Dangerous]

I think Vince sees tons of potential in Punk as well as all the other newer wrestlers. He knows what he is doing. Right now while all the older guys are in their final few years he is trying to make it good on for them so they can all go out with a bang. He hasn't forgotten about the likes of Punk, Bryan, Ziggler, Wade, Rhoades etc.. All of these guys will get their turns and they will all be legends one day. I do in the future see Punk as being the next big thing but I also don't think it will be any time soon while people like Undertaker and HBK are still around.